The 2008 financial crisis in the United States was a systemic fraud in which the wealthy finance capitalists stole trillions of public dollars. No one was jailed for this crime, the largest theft of public money in history.

Instead, the rich forced working people across the globe to pay for their crisis through punitive austerity programs that gutted public services and repealed workers' rights.

This documentary explains the nature of capitalist crisis, visits the protests against austerity measures, and recommends revolutionary paths for the future.

Special attention is devoted to the crisis in Greece, the 2010 G20 Summit protest in Toronto, Canada, and the remarkable surge of solidarity in Madison, Wisconsin.

Derrick Jensen says he wants to take us back to the stone age. That is how he will solve our crisis. If you listen to him you will solve the problem of some houses getting foreclosed by having everyone give up all their worldly possessions.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

The Marxists seem really happy in this film.

Capitolista99

Ahhh yes...Unionize, thats the answer. That way we can run more effeciency. I mean after all, that worked well for all the GM workers. Capitalism is not the problem, Government intervention is the problem. Laisse Fare people. Lets see, debt, gee I wonder why everyone needs the latest big screen or celular. Yes , its the banks that put a gun to those fiscally responsible in order to run up credit card bills. The banks are at fault. Afterall everyone needs to live in a 5000 square foot home and drive a brand new car earning only 20k a year.

Once the government takes from those that work and gives to those that dont...it ceases to be a democarcy.

Hey I have an idea, why not come up with an idea or product worth selling. Create it sell it create jobs doing it and work hard doing it all the while dont splurge your profits and always save a percentage for the future using tax deffered programs like an IRA. Nope that wont work because you will have union workers that will expect you to risk eveything so that you can pay them a nice big salary so they can go and overspend live in a 5000 sq ft home and drive a cadillac.

Branefart

What's wrong with the stone ages? People actually got off their a**es and did things productively during the day, or they died.

I'm not saying lets get rid of everything, but we surely don't "need" most of the material c*** we consume ourselves with.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

That's just c***. People says stuff like that, "Let's go back to the stone ages. Things were so much nicer in the stone ages." and then, "Of course we didn't really mean the stone ages". I had to put up with that mushy thinking all through my child-hood. I'm not a kid anymore. You're full of s*** and you are teaching this to children and weak minded adults. Our president is even following this ideal. He says, "At a certain point you've made enough money". Apparently he meant the US. Why don't you guys just have some balls and come out with your real plan. You want to return to your romanticized view of the stone age and you will have to reduce the Earth's population by about 95% to still support everyone on subsistence farming or hunting and gathering. Have some balls. Say what you mean.

i'm quite sure, there is no real argument that most of us have more junk than we need to get by.
my question to all viewers is, with large amounts of people protesting and marching for their cause,(it seems like a lot) could they have a majority vote when the next election came up?

it seems obvious that if enough people support an idea that they should be able to change country policies by voting in un-tampered elections. (the difficulty of fair elections is a whole another argument but for the sake of this argument, it will be excluded)

so whats happening?
we receive political leaders that most of us don't like (or dislike worse then others) but they had to voted in by supporters from the general public. (we might just be a minority, who knows?)
so is it okay for me to say that a majority of the public approves many of the same laws and policies that many of us are now arguing about?(i'm really asking! not rhetorical)

so my last question for the people is; how can we make progress as a society in as efficient and sustainable way as humanly possible?
more marching?
anarchy implementation?
stricter consumption policies by gov?
and i could keep on going with ideas.

but one idea that may help everything, since taking a statistics class.
we need to have more conclusive studies on issues of the present day.

every up and coming study about X Y Z always some has uncertainty.
to quote a great but angry comedian lewis black.

"The people who told us about sun block were the same people who told us, when I was a kid, that eggs were good. So I ate a lot of eggs. Ten years later they said they were bad. I went, "Well, I just ate the eggs!" So I stopped eating eggs, and ten years later they said they were good again! Well, then I ate twice as many, and then they said they were bad. Well, now I'm really f*****! Then they said they're good, they're bad, they're good, the whites are good, th-the yellows - make up your mind! It's breakfast I've gotta eat!"

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Whoops! Sorry moderator. Thanks!

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

We've gotta eat... while our minders make up their minds.

The solution: Capitalism. Each person decides for himself. I was just at a community meeting on the economy last night. Everyone was talking about the exact way to tweak the regulations for the whole country. Everyone has different ideas about this. Everyone is sure we need regulations. But then everyone disagrees on the exact regulations. Then we are supposed to tell them to one person and vote every four years and hope he remembers what we said. That is like driving a bus by committee. We need something more responsive.

Branefart

lol ok .. I have never been caught up in the industrialized headache created by man, I'm stress free and I smile at life. I just observe what I see and form an opinion like every other human being on the planet, regardless of how weak their adult mind is.

It's pretty obvious that society in the west is failing and it's only a matter of time before everything collapses and the world as we know it falls backwards.

I'm not good at explaining, don't shoot!

http://www.facebook.com/justin.lesniewski Justin Lesniewski

I dont know who said that Money is the Root of All Evil, but that man embodied the feeling I've had since I was introduced to "society" and the "real world". It's hard for me to put into words the scathing sentiments I have about capitalism and "moneyism". Most of the time I just go by this gut feeling, that I would say was instilled in me by nature herself. I've spent an inordinate amount of time studying the classic novels and books. All of this time I've been searching for the underlying reason why our way of life is wrong. Thoreau, Twain, Nietzsche, Dumas, I scoured their words and many others for a gem of brilliance that would reveal the stain of our lives. The very simple choice we have that, what I have got to have, must be at the cost of another man having it. Or simply put, myself over others!

And there is no other way to explain it, when a man is dying that with our technology and science could be saved, but yet he has not the fortune of being born into a "rich" family, explain that to this man! Explain that to your "God". You cannot live because you havent got the pocket change, "sir.".

These doctors, they charge 7 zero's for the ability to access this technology. I have no doubts that alot of them wonder at the displacement of wealth. How else could someone trained for the welfare of humanity see the world? When all they really do is hit the power button on a machine sometimes, and they are paid loads of money because of that. I dont doubt that surgery requires great skill, but everything underneath that is just a prescription, or the pushing of a button...

Is there a reason to guard this science by money in case it could be wasted on so called lesser men? No! They say it's simply ran by electricity, and a supposed love of medicine and doctoring. Its actually run by greed, men charge for the ability to live! Is that not the most inhumane thing? Even in the tooth and claw of the animal kingdom at least they die with honor. We die knowing that we were unfortunate!

No longer does the american dream disillusion men, into thinking that there is enough for everyone to go around. No, we know that scarcity is becoming a force to be reckoned with and growing daily. Do any of us lie to ourselves about the coming years, that they will be very cruel and injust? A paltry example today is in comparison with what could come.

Perhaps if we buy the latest shoes, and wear the latest fashions, we can somehow fix in our mind an equality of sorts. That we are worth as much as the next man, as long as we have a well running car, a health insurance plan, a flat screen TV, a two car garage...

But these things are just fetters and trappings. The tinsel of capitalism. For what we have lived these days, and seen in spirit, will come a thousand times stronger when our way of life cannot be sustained. We trade progress, actual cosmic progress for luxuries... despite all warnings from every side Man insists on running his busy world with gasoline. Man insists on Government that takes advantage of the majority. Man no longer lives an adventure, he just watches a movie. And these days the stories in our movies reflect the tired sentiment of our storytellers. We focus on apocalyptic scenarios with religious fervor, our love stories are somehow seemingly shallow. I myself despair when I think of the pride we have in our society, although knowing that a Shakespeare could never be born here again.

I would sometimes consider it a thousand times greater justice to have our entire civilization leveled by nature, and be forced to build it all over again. Is there any of us that doubt we would make the same mistake? If this mode of life continues, eventually the barbaries of life will drive us all into a vengeful self sustainment. As if that has not already happened. Look at how our kids treat each other, they subdivide into groups of their own. They bully each other out of this...carnal desire to be stronger, or better... it really seems like we are devolving to the level of dumb beasts to me. Capitalism is the opposite of evolution, and is turning us all against each other. Albeit, we are "technically sophisticated" beasts that drive a lexus, and are armed with a cup holder that keeps their drinks warm or cold. Soon we will no longer have the grace to carry our fellow men. So dark and driven will be our desire to look after ourselves that we voluntarily let the welfare of others go to waste, even lead them into death. Under our watchful eyes. This is already happening.

What has all of man's "progress" in science been for, when the miracle of technology is denied simply because of the lack of money. However you look at it, money has entrenched itself in our spirits and sullied them almost beyond repair. We are a species that plucks at hedonism while living in a veritable garbage heap of morals, and soon our collective home will follow to reflect that decadence of the last 300 years. It all comes down to one simple thing if you ask me, "Money".

If we destroy this idea of the have and have nots, then we will finally see true progress. If you call yourself proud to live in this day and age then you are not awake, we impose this style of living because of an opinion on what is civilized! What would "God" say, as we look disdainfully on the trees we came from, and say that living like that is "uncivilized". What would "God" say if he knew that men were breathing just to breathe?

In closing, on a positive note, I believe that the spirit of capitalism is dying with that whole 1900's generation. I don't mean to insult anyone by that statement, I just mean that the idealism of capitalism is sitting on shaky ground. Some of our youths are realizing the empty promise of it all, like in the sixties. Alot of them took psychoactive substances and started "waking up". However that was too soon a time, and the world wasn't ready to listen to a bunch of hippies, consciousness expanded or not.

But anyway not to fear, nature is instilling in some of us a gut feeling to be repulsed by it all. Even without a college education to back up what we say! Just a young man with a message, educated by himself, but for everything else. The latest generation is seeing more and more, that money is just a means to an end. Nothing in and of itself. And when these tired old money grubs are put into the ground that whole idealism will take a shattering blow. You can see this even today with the 99% protests in America. Hell, I even have faith that nature planned for all of this, even though it seems completely against her. She made it as a test for us, a kind of "cosmic evolutionary faith" test.

---a heartfelt belief that all of this wasn't put into motion to be derailed by such a petty sentiment as greed.

http://www.facebook.com/justin.lesniewski Justin Lesniewski

"For the love of money placed before the love of God is the root of all kinds of evil." -Tim. 6: 10

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"I dont know who said that Money is the Root of All Evil, but that man embodied the feeling I've had since..."

Unless it's government money right? Then it's the solution to all our problems.

You guys are just regurgitating Marxian theory that was proved wrong so many times. Where is the USSR? Why has China turned (finally) towards capitalism? You like this theory because you believe it gives you the moral right to other peoples money. If you say that no one really owns anything then you think you will be able to have whatever you want, as long as you don't want "too much". Mwaha... Mwahahahaha!!! You don't know how insane your idea is and you don't care because it might justify your urge to plunder!! STOP it! It is YOU that is killing our economy. As long as you hold this idea and popularize it it will be your doing that brings the downfall of the wealth of this nation.

Let markets rise! Let wealth rise! Let other people get fabulously rich! Do the same thing yourself!!! That is what pays the producers. Property. Capitalism!

http://www.facebook.com/justin.lesniewski Justin Lesniewski

i think that you and I, Mark, are on different sides of the spectrum. I still respect your opinion though and read it without bias. I'm not sure what you mean to say... it sounds like you are pinning me for a bitter person who is mad that I cannot have what the hard working man has earned? Just by this statement alone you reveal your own materialistic tendency. I have since realized that the grass is always greener on the other side. Despite what your life has led you to believe, life is not a fair hand dealt to every man. And for this I am disappointed. I believe that chivalry is something that has been lost on you, because I tell you truly I would fight for the underdog everytime. My own gain was never a concern when I wrote what I did and to imply so is quite doggedly of you if I may say so. In my defense I have to say that its humble, forward thinking, chivalrous men who have always believed in the common good of every man. In your defense you will perhaps find the ranks of Oilmen and Rockefellers, and I do not envy your company. We strive to create a decent life for not only themselves, but every other man around them. If you would insist that a good life is something that power should dictate, then you really should be living with apes or something. I realized early in life that no man can completely think without his ego at hand, but empathy and awareness have shown me that to aim for this is as close to grace as we could get. As hard as it may be for some to believe, man can really misunderstand each other... just by the way life has treated you. You see me as something I'm definitely not, and I doubt i'd be able to shake your hunch either. But I will say this in my defense sir, I care very little for material possessions. I spend most of my time reading 6 dollar paperbacks, and eating ramen noodles. I enjoy a good meal as much as the next man, but I also respect that without working hard you will never really savor it.

when men stop throwing dirt at each other, they will bury themselves in common ground

1unto0

The unethical and immoral accumulation of wealth without the actions of meaningful socially beneficial contributions should be met with capital punishment. Those responsible for ripping off the masses should be executed, pubically, and have all or at least most of their assets liquidated and injected directly into social programs. Those who harbour such tyrants should face jail time, and in general blue blooded crimes should face the harshest penalties of any crimes in this world, because it is these crimes against humanity and world that result in the creation of a vast environment of inequality within which all other crimes arise. It is literally time to take to the streets and drag these capitalist swine from their gated communities, read unto them their sins and kill them on the side of the bloody road to liberation. Tell the million plus people who die unjustly everyday that I am wrong.

steamknife

Is this why people would give up their money for god? ie. Donate to Churches and miracle healers in the hope to get to heaven when they die?

The bible will be very awkward if we humans developed into a non money driven society. Also, this statement certainly won't work in North Korea.

1unto0

You break it-I buy it? I don't buy it...

http://princejaka.wordpress.com princeton

couldn't have said it better myself

its funny when people pretend that capitalism is the problem when over half of all our money is taken by force and spent to bail-out private groups...or better yet drone bomb little kids in africa.

but.. oh its free trade.. its mom and pop stores and lemonade stands that caused the problem.. not the facts that

1. we are forced to use a fiat currency
2. we are forced to give the govt a portion of our income
3. we are forced to obey many trade laws and regulations (thousands) ..

and no exageration, we will literally be shot for refusing to pay
but yet you have parrots come around and scream that its deregulation (free unhindered voluntary trade) that is the problem.. u people.. *smacks forehead*

Capitalism -- The great symbol of freedom and liberty. Where if you work hard enough, and can live long enough, you too can be the next billionaire! Sure, some small sacrifices will have to be made on your road to riches, but nothing is worth having if you are not willing to lie, cheat, and steal for it.

Start by devoting every waking moment to your career. This will impress your bosses when it comes time for that next big promotion you've had your eye on. Also, it's a great way to lose that nagging wife, and pesky children you've been wanting to get rid of for years!

Now, you're going to be stepping on an awful lot of people on your way to the top, so I suggest you invest in a solid pair of shoes. I recommend steel-toe (for that added f*** you effect!)

With your family long gone, and all of your co-workers properly ostracized, you may begin to feel a sense of hollowness, and desolation. Do not be afraid, that void your feeling inside you is where your soul use to be. Thankfully, this emptiness can be endlessly filled with materialism and meaningless relationships!

Before I leave you, do not forget that we could never perpetuate this glorious system without your inattentive and unquestioned participation. So, please defend it vigorously. Austerity and trolling-rhetoric are not enough--tease the homeless too.

Your friend and defender,

Tiamanicus

judyutah

this docu goes to 54:44 not all the way to 1:39 + minutes. what's wrong?

Sheeraz Ullah

test

musbcrazy

personally i think your wrong, corporatism is the problem. free market capitalism with sound money is a very good way to achieve effective economies! why dont you blame the politicians who've deregulated systems in a way, so toxic mortgage and derivative products could bankrupt our countries and how politicians use public money to bail out their bank friends instead of the families struggling to pay their bills. i think some of you have forgotten we have a socialist state not a capitalist one so if u want to live in a socialist welfare state then so be it....just remember you reap what you sow! me if i work hard, i want to keep what i earn not support those who cant be arsed to work.

i think perhaps having the life and society id like is not possible in Europe or the UK. god please get Ron Paul in the white house next year because then Im selling my house and business and taking my assetts and work ethic to the states.

why i should i pay for my elderly care with what ive earned instead of it going to my children and why should i work to produce tax to support those who just spunge off the system!

musbcrazy

totally agree fellow libertarian....we have no f****** clue how to look after ourselves, we've been turned into a country of believers and not free thinkers, who need somebody or thing to look after them instead of individual responsibility!

free market capitalism with sound money where politics, finance and military are separate as they were intended.

i know its not UK related but it blows me away that in a place like the US they have more pharmaceutical lobbyists than congressman in Washington and you can bet your bottom dollar there's a similar type of manifested power in our parliament!

budge5

A very intesting subject that we are all affected by, ruined by a propogandist that might as well be a bankers prole.
How is anyone going to take in 100words (in print) and their provenance in 2 seconds.
Rid us of Media studies grads with the bankers.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Nathan-Daniel/1294931557 Nathan Daniel

You got to be crazy, you gotta have a real need
You gotta sleep on your toes and when you're on the street
You got to be able to pick out the easy meat with your eyes closed
And then moving in silently, down wind and out of sight
You gotta strike when the moment is right without thinking

And after a while, you can work on points for style
Like the club tie, and the firm handshake
A certain look in the eye and an easy smile
You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to
So that when they turn their backs on you
You'll get the chance to put the knife in

You gotta keep one eye looking over your shoulder
You know, it's going to get harder, and harder, and harder
As you get older
Yeah, and in the end you'll pack up and fly down south
Hide your head in the sand
Just another sad old man
All alone and dying of cancer

And when you lose control, you'll reap the harvest you have sown
And as the fear grows, the bad blood slows and turns to stone
And it's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around
So have a good drown, as you go down all alone
Dragged down by the stone

Gotta admit that I'm a little bit confused
Sometimes it seems to me as if I'm just being used
Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise
If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze

Deaf, dumb and blind, you just keep on pretending
That everyone's expendable, and no one has a real friend
And it seems to you the thing to do would be to isolate the winner
Everything's done under the sun
But you believe at heart everyone's a killer

Who was born in a house full of pain
Who was trained not to spit in the fan
Who was told what to do by the man
Who was broken by trained personnel
Who was fitted with collar and chain
Who was given a pat on the back
Who was breaking away from the pack
Who was only a stranger at home
Who was ground down in the end
Who was found dead on the phone
Who was dragged down by the stone

dufas_duck

Equal outcome for all, gotta love it. It would be just like my child's school, every kid gets an award for anything they do....or don't do. If this were the Olympics, everyone would get a gold medal, wouldn't that be great. This would also make life easier for people like the Nobel Prize committee, everyone would get a prize, no questions asked, or these things would be eliminated altogether...they do smack of competition..

Since it has been deemed that no one is to buy or even needs that big screen TV, that Ipod, Ebook, or nicer car, those employees that used to work in these industries can be assigned to work in agriculture, street sweeping, or cleaning toilets. The pay is the same so what a person does doesn't matter.

Health care shouldn't matter. Natural is the word of the day. Animals in the 'natural' world do not have health care so the 'natural' thing to do is if someone is hurt, sick, or otherwise infirm, either make them comfortable or let them be....Solves the population problem.

Freedom is to be what the 'state' deems it to be and anything else is to be aggressively curtailed. There will not be any political parties, only one, world wide bureau to oversee everything. Life will be great.....

EndlessNow

has anyone considered something along the lines of an internet-based Bank of the People? A bank made by the people for the people, with users contributing to help the bank operate, so that the bank could run with no fees, and any profits this bank may earn (through investment or whatever) would be divided proportionally among all depositors. Funds held by this bank could be verified over the web, so that an audit of this bank could be performed by anyone at home from their computer(and then another person could perform the same audit somewhere else and the two audits would actually agree in real time). Transparent, responsible banking for the people by the people. People withdrawing their money from corrupt, profiteering banks would be a good thing, wouldn't it?

I mean, all of us together could do a better job than these few people in control of our banks. A bank for the people by the people would be far more likely to invest in companies and industries that reflect what the people actually support, like real renewable energy for example, or innovative construction companies that use 21st century technology to provide low cost, high tech housing and other structures. This would be a way for the people to harness their money, to create a large pool of citizens' money (money=power) to use as a tool to change the world in ways they would welcome. The more that people are able to control their own money and are able to use it in ways that come back to them in direct benefit (eg. job creation through investment in innovative companies), the less likely it is that violence would be necessary to correct current economic and social problems. Instead of nonviolent resistance, this would be an aggressive economic resistance. Fight money with money.

I welcome constructive criticism of course...I'm know I'm not smart enough, nor do I know enough, to know if an idea like this is workable.

over the edge

@EndlessNow
unless i am misunderstanding your point what you are suggesting is a credit union. these institutions (depending on jurisdiction and laws) are not for profit or limited to "reasonable" profit and all members get equal vote .

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DMXD5XCPXG46B6HCCJIIOJCNGE Abe Jones

Socialists and Anarchist you gotta love-em

No alternative solutions but they're eager to tear down

EndlessNow

i guess like a credit union but with no board of directors. Designed to be more interactive so that the people, or the principals (in a principal-agent problem sense), are more involved in controlling the flow of their money using the technology of the internet. So I'm picturing a highly informational, highly interactive website that we could all design together to help us manage money and resources in effective ways relevant to our world. Like a Wiki for our money,,,because what we do with our money ought to be highly dependent on good information that we are all sharing with one another. Maybe this bank could best be framed as an online game, something Jane McGonigal might know something about. I'm picturing a highly decentralized banking system based on what we know about complex systems, that we should use the scale-free network that is the internet to house and inform another scale-free network, our economy, through banking intially. I think some scheme like this could eventually become very influential and powerful because it would be highly adaptive and responsive to real world events and actual physical realities. I guess it being designed like a game could work. Bring econmics into the 21st century by admitting that money and our economic systems are little more than games we have invented, serious games that have real consequences, but games nonetheless.

All the above may be very stupid, idk! Any help is most welcome.

lex lexich

you are an ai di ai ou ti

Guest

You tell 'em like it really is, Pink! On the day to day and the year to year. You call 'em out for the greedy, earth-destroying, people-destroying dog-packs they are.
Label them what they do and
Lay them down under the monument they have made
Let the weight of it keep them there
Let a mirror there with them be what
Their dead faces see forever
(Just for irony)
And let the ghosts finally rise up
Who would make the world a living thing
Without the need to beat down others for its blood

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DMXD5XCPXG46B6HCCJIIOJCNGE Abe Jones

The film left me thinking ...Why doesn't Noemi Klein sell her upper-class condo in downtown Toronto and move into that Winnipeg Vegan Co-op?

I was struck in the film by how the Anarchist Vegan Co-op guy said there have to be rules.

Maybe Noemi can write a book : Rules for Trading Grapes for Tomatoes In the Post-Capitalist Order

Achems_Razor

@EndlessNow:

No problem thinking about new ideas, but my thinking is that an internet bank would not be secure enough, I can just see the hackers wringing their hands with glee.

And also the "Banksters" that probably? control the economy, and probably? the world for that matter, would never allow such a venture, they will tell the powers that be to activate the internet kill switch, if there is such a thing.

Tobias Dresler

Why don't you educate yourself ?
''I was struck in the film by how the Anarchist Vegan Co-op guy said there have to be rules.''
Anarchy does not mean ''without rules''
it means without authority.
we dont fight the police to be without rules.
we fight to be without authority.
capitalism enforces oppression upon the people. i for one could be without that.

without rules that would be insane, and an easy lie to tell to promote your own propaganda. but rules can be decided by the people in power, (you and me)
not by some people who are supposed to be elected by the people.
the rules can easily be changed or altered by the people, and not have to go through some bureaukratic capitalist set of other rules.

im just saying. its my opinion. if you want to live like slaves, thats fine. im not gonna do it.-

Radhaya

The end of this doc is interesting, I didn't realize there were so many demonstrations in other countries. Looks like a global revolution may be at hand. Ah, but can they succeed against the techno-military establishments with their advantage in weaponry? Maybe they can get their respective armies and navies to defect like the Russians did, then they may have a chance. The money-changers had better not anger the military with their austerity programs.

EndlessNow

I think good security and operational protocols would be attainable. I believe a complex network like this game/ebank model would have robust, built-in security safegaurds. In the same way the internet itself is robust and has never broken down (the internet's the most complex machine we have ever built), so too could we design a model that is highly resistant to attack, fraud, or mismanagement. To better facilitate our economic and social needs. As we live in the information age I believe we ought to be designing a system to harness information to delineate appropriate, efficient economic and governance models, instead of what currently happens; information and technology being used to exploit old and outdated economic and political modalities. And if some genius hacker managed to pwn the game, well game states would be robustly distrubuted and saved amongst the memory of all users' computers, possibly allowing the game just to be reset to an earlier state before whatever hacking occured. I can imagine other scenarios where meaningful catastrophic hacking would be very, very hard. Though this sort of thrust and parry over securing information is only an extension of an information war already being fought, a war which may be fought for a long time to come.

For now though, it seems obv to me that we are underutilizing the internet and it's potential to help us run the world, to set policy, or to, say, allocate funds within a national budget. I mean, we live in a technological society now, capable of production, communication, and analysis orders of magnitude greater than just 40 yrs ago.

And yet we still hold to these old, inefficient models of governance and finance. Seems backwards at the very least; criminally irresponsible and inefficient from other perspectives. Given the state of the economy and all the wars going on these old ways ought to be condemned as the failures that they are. Imagine the government investing just 1 billion dollars to research alternative economic models consistent with our current technological abilities. There are loads of smart people out there who would gladly contribute. Why isn't this happening?

It is my strong belief that the progress of technology will be the downfall of the old, traditionally tyrannical or centralized models of government because, unless these old systems are willing to promote or allow innovation in all sectors of our lives, (and in doing so relinquish much of their power), a cognitive dissonance will grow over what people know is possible and what their actualities are.

I personally believe that innovation is being held back, and it may be an entirely reasonable extrapolation that innovation will be ruthlessly controlled to further current agendas and power structures. That tyranny will reign supreme. For example, it is possible that the power/money elite could hoard advances in life-extension and intelligence augmentation for themselves, maybe just through the sheer cost these new technologies may initially have.

Achievement of these posthuman goals would be a great prize imo, and the first people to have access to this technology would have a great advantage over the rest of us. So great that we can only imagine what those advantages may be. Given historical examples of technologically advanced people subjugating, stealing the land and resources of, or just plain killing those less advanced then them, I place no great faith in posthuman altruism-we may be just so much computational substrate for them to consume.

Just spittin out thoughts here. Comments and constructive criticism are always welcome.

CapnCanard

Capitalism is inherently unsustainable and we are currently going through THE COLLAPSE. How's your 401k? What is your home, er house worth? This is part of an environmental and societal catastrophic collapse... but is was all very preventable, but wealth will not doing anything to stop it.

Yavanna

So YOU are the one that voted for GW!!!! (the rest of the votes were rigged)

It all makes sense now! You forgot to mention huge tax breaks for the rich and corporations.

Derp derpy derpy derp! Must be so nice to live on that simple planet you live on.

CapnCanard

well, I agree. But I would say that it is obvious that innovation is held back because true innovation is not necessarily the main goal or outcome of profit. The whole capitalist model of profit seems at best to be cannibalistic, if a capitalist makes a better product the capitalist may produce their way out of a job. I've come to believe that Capitalism is like a 3-card monte huckster playing a confidence game. And we all got suckered.

Now that is my rambling thought... by the way I feel that at some level there must be a consciousness must change for all of us. Thank god for OWS.

CapnCanard

Achems Razor, perhaps MONEY is the problem. Value needs to examined and discussed.

CapnCanard

Abe Jones, you need to contemplate what Anarchism is before commenting on anarchy. Here's a clue: I personally see Anarchy as distributed and decentralized authority. In contrast, our current Authority in the hands of a select minority is very dangerous. Look around yourself...

http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

Anarchy (Greek): The state of chaos which arises in the absence of government.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504733309 Tommy Ashton-Foster

David you need to read a bit more to discover what Anarchy is. Your one liner is dripping with cool-aid

http://www.facebook.com/DungaBill William O'Donnell

Is this why governments want us to save our money so they can 'borrow ' off it & then make it disappear in a 'financial crisis' ?

http://twitter.com/rymdraketen rymdraketen

Barbarian: the greek word for everyone outside Athens

http://twitter.com/rymdraketen rymdraketen

No alternative solutions? go back to your books kid...

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZMK6YNWJACHQ5CRCJW5TNYFURI KsDevil

The use of credit unions, in combination with barter and trade of goods and services would bypass the corporate stranglehold on the economy and the government. In fact, everyone should get used to that since oil is peaking and our current system will become even less sustainable. And always remember: money is just a tool to standardize trade. It is the traded that is all important. You can cut out the middle man and the trade is still valid.

StevenLJones

Power is with the people. Individually your nothing and helpless and powerless and alone. Together you have all the power. If all the students in the United States collectively said we are not going to pay our loans, what would happen? The state depends on the police and military. My advice is make friends with them and get them on side, because without the police and military the state is nothing. Remember the bottom line they are from your class and your neighborhoods and they are people with families and mortgages and bills and threats of unemployment. People agree to follow the system. Then the system works to enslave them. Disagree.
Business will always exist in some form. Corporations too. It's time to fire the 1% and change the laws to reflect the needs of democracy and society and planet as a whole. The enigma for the 1% is that if you don't make a good living, you can't buy their products and they go broke. So it really is in Capitalism interest to make sure that you have disposable income. The more the better for everybody. So your downfall is eventually theirs. Austerity programs will backfire. Austerity programs won't make corporations rich, it will make them poor.

In the media Anarchism is associated with violence and nothing else. As long as Anarchism vandalize buildings and burn cars that's what people image of them will be. Violence only gets reported nothing else and labeled anarchy. It doesn't work. Educate me. Put up posters in every neighborhood of truths that I can't be denied. Back it up with fact. Lastly take responsibility for our own part in this mess. Unions have made it hard for Western business to compete with the east. I worked at a pulp mill and union guys would take a week to do a 2 hour job. Sorry we have some facing up to do as well. And lastly watch that you don't become what you hate.

Key to a free democracy is a media that isn't controlled by its advetisers or government or other interests. A Media that is simply interested in the truth. How you do this I don't know but it would fix a lot problems fast.

EndlessNow

i agree that money is obsolete in many ways, especially in it's current form where the FED counterfits as the FED sees fit. (fingers crossed-no QE3, no QE3!!) But we are all in this together, whether we like it or not, and it's our acceptance of this particular social contract that is causing many problems.

But we can't just go off money cold turkey- we need a transition period. And I think we need to optimize our economic system by recognizing that it is a complex system, and that no small cadre of bankers have the knowledge to know what is best for the economy and, by extension, what is best for the people. We need to use the internet to organize and efficently direct our economy along the lines of what the people want, instead of just what a portion believes is best. How you do this could take on many forms and I believe this an interesting problem and it must be looked at by smart people of good conscience.

I believe the same holds true of governance. Imagine national budgets being decided online by registered voters (giving the people a direct voice in setting their nation's economic policy)-is it plausible that American voters, if given this option, would fund militarism the way America does now, or the decades old, inhumane, and unrealistic War on Drugs? Seems fairly unlikely. Though people often believe odd things, and often want things that harm them- it is a complicated world out there. So obv good information is priceless. We need to communicate.

In the electronics industry money flows where it wants to, with no real major interference from government, and innovation happens, here and there, constantly, by people around the world. It is spectacular. But the building of our homes, our shelters, one of our basic human necessities, is still hideously wasteful, slow, and expensive. The rate of real innovation in home construction relative to our level of technology seems very slow. I mean, we landed on the moon over forty years ago and this is the best we can do when it comes building our homes? This doesn't make sense.

I believe there are many good people out there trying to do good in the world-at the FED, in our goverments, in our economics departments, in our police forces, in our militaries, and all across society. I believe all of us together are way way way smarter than the people we turn over control and responsibility to. I'm not trying to put down government or the FED- there are just way way way more people not involved in these professions than are. The key is to allow technology to get people reinvolved in society at many levels. Technology makes this possible where it wasn't possible just a few generations ago.

We don't have to transition all at once, that wouldn't work, but we seriously need to understand the role that money plays in our technological society capable of massive production and whether or not this role makes sense anymore.

EndlessNow

maybe 999 is the answer

skylar0201

I think you meant 666 LOL

EndlessNow

lol, they should have known people would flip it upside down and reverse it, or rotate it 180 degrees :D

but they clearly wanted to keep it close to 10% (because when exploiting people you have an edge, and I'd guess that edge is stablest socially around 55-45) besides that there's tithes and we have ten fingers, and the decimal system is based on the number ten, and there are ten planets, and there are ten commandments,

but 10 is in the double digits while 9 is in the single digits,,,not only that 999 makes it sound like a discount sale, like a good deal, like something they're selling that you'd be foolish not to buy. And it's so easy to remember-what's not to like :P

http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

Actually, Tommy, I don't go around changing the definitions of words simply because I don't like what they imply, or because I want to use them as a rallying cry against my enemies. Anarchy means exactly what I told you it means. And if you keep looking for it, chances are you will find it!

http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

Yeah, and Heathen is the Hebrew word for everyone outside of Israel, and Terrorist is the English word for everyone outside the 'First World'. Different books; different authors; same old story.

Antonis D. Politis

Thank you for this doc. You re doing a great job. Greetings from Athens.

Anarchy is derived from Greek David but that definition is false An- NO Archon- Ruler. Anarchy means no rulers, not no rules.

texasgirl46

What a waste of 2 hours....

giorgiomax

Before seeing the video and judging by the cover...

isn't this video like blaming the cars instead of the drivers for the accidents?

If Capitalism is a tool, like a hammer, to create value, and the users use it for smashing other people, then... ahm.., we need to change the hammer for a rope...,??? is this what the video is going to say?

I can't see how people will not shoke other people with the rope.

Every "explanation" or examples I've seen so far in this video have been about PEOPLE doing bad things to other people..., instead of they're UNABLE to do good things.

Are there cars that can stop us if we wanted to crash / kill people if we wanted to?

I do agree that there could be tools that help avoid negative outcomes more than other tools... hmm.., but, does it really worth that "revolution" just to end up with the same people.

I'm pretty sure people can manage to take advantage from other people regardless of what they have on hand.

I'll keep watching the video just a bit more.

CherryBombpop

I just want to say this to you - I've been paying into the system since I was 16 years old, and I'm 48 now. I have always worked and payed taxes. Now that I'm laid off and can't find a job, heck yes I'm going to take unemployment. I've paid my unemployment insurance for basically my entire life. They're giving me my own money back, as I see it, until I can find a job with a living wage. I rent a single room, I take public transportation, and I don't even have a TV. Most of my friends are in similar situations. I never had a big car, a flat screen, or the latest phone, even when I had a nice job. So not everyone fits your neat little profile there.

Adrienne Clark

Thank you for saying that. You and I and many many others have paid into the system from our paychecks to cover, unemployment benefits, social security, etc. Whenever you receive any benefit, you are also required to pay taxes on those resources as additional income. I don't understand why people act like others are getting over by receiving assistance that we ALL are taxed on while we are employed and TAXED AGAIN (aksa 1099) when we use the assistance! None of the money is free paying into or paying out.

http://twitter.com/ThomasEmmanuel6 Thomas Emmanuel

Mark Stouffer:

USSR, China, Cuba ect. was not marxist, communist states. The power was not with the people, but with a few (maybe one) people. What was in those countries was "state capitalism". Read up.

This documentary is horribly misleading and presents many lies as facts. We have real problems when it comes to loopholes for large corporations, cronyism, the Fed, but this movie goes off the deep end with an extremely liberal agenda.

Please don't waste your time on this.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Who says capitalism is a neutral tool? No system is. I suppose you also blame ordinary people in the former Soviet Union for the horrors of that system and for its collapse. If political systems were all just neutral tools in the hands of people who do both good and bad things, then it wouldn't matter which system one lived under, life within them would all be the same.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

There's no such thing as 'state capitalism', an oxymoron. Capitalism is the individual or corporate control and ownership of the means of production. Socialism (or state communism) is the government control and ownership of the means of production.
Read up.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Yes, laissez faire, yeah because that's worked so well. let's see, let's start by deregulating the banking and financial system...oh wait, we all know how that worked out.

Utterly ridiculous comment.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

What romanticized view of the stone age? You mean the egalitairan social structure? The four hour work day? The freedom and autonomy, without being under someone else's rule and constant totalitarian surveillance? The health and fitness without all the chronic degenerative diseases? The free access to resources? The close knit social bonds of kinship instead of suspicion and paranoia? The relative social peace, instead of constant militarism and warfare? The clean water and fresh air?

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Dude, if everyone was rich, the economy would collapse. Poverty is built in to capitalism. Someone, somewhere has to be poor for the system to work. Who's going to clean toilets, sweep streets, make cheap clothing in horrible factories or pick crops for below minimum wage, or serve you fries if everyone was rich?
Think before you post.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Who said everyone had to be rich? Maybe if you included the quote you are referring to it would help clarify your seemingly non-sequitor statement.

"The party is OVER on Wall Street! here's a trilllion dollars." --Nancy Pelosi

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

This film is mostly talking heads and protest porn.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

"Let markets rise! Let wealth rise! Let other people get fabulously rich! Do the same thing yourself!!!"

The implication of "do the same thing yourself" being that anyone and everyone can in principle be rich.

Bilbo Baggins

More lame internet journalism...

Avoid...

http://twitter.com/SkumboGumbo Skumbo Gumbo

great film, thanks. its good to see a film in this genre that doesnt go too over the top with the conspiracy theory stuff- this is far more grounded in reality than zeitgeist, inside job etc... id recommend

emenot

Capitalism is not the cause, its GLOBALIZATION!

Kane Sinclair-Sojka

A poorly executed documentary. Anyone can gather headline articles and flash them up on the screen in PowerPoint fashion. Didn't get past the ten minute mark.

Collima

I just finished watching your documentary, “Capitalism is the Crisis”; I must say that I appreciate being able to view it online.

What I most appreciated was not only was I given an insightful analysis of the development of capitalism, but also some great ideas for implementation for change.

One sentence stood out for me: “all resistance begins with a reorientation of how we relate to the world.” I have heard economics defined as “the relationships between people”. I would reword your statement to: “all resistance begins with a reorientation of how we relate to one another.” It is our wrong relationships with each other that bring disequilibrium to the entire world.

The workers’ cooperatives seem ideal transitions from our current system. When we correct relationships between us, we will be able to provide everyone with everything that we need – all of us around the world. Thanks for giving such great examples!

TheHappyCynic

So, you rather establish authoritative fictions like property and abstract wealth. Because it works so well...

Robert159

you have to TAKE it, I know what government is doing is wrong, you know it.
So the question is why do we allow it? for safety? fear of being thrown in a cage?
The war is here ladies and gentlemen either you choose to realize it or not.
the only way to fight back is simply not pay your taxes. claim 10 on you dependents and take your money back.
we have enough numbers. We the People MUST speak NOW!!

Robert159

you are blind sir .. sorry to say

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Property is fiction? What is fact? Improperty? Would you prefer a system of plunder, as the had in the Soviet Union?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"The workers’ cooperatives seem ideal transitions from our current system. When we correct relationships between us"

Do you mean force is the solution? Wow, that's really novel. Way to think outside the box.

Or do you mean that everyone will voluntarily join workers' cooperatives? Why don't they do that now?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Markets don't favor militarism and war. Those are the favorite pass-times of governments. Where did you learn to spout this anti-business nonsense, in your government run school?

Markets tools are trust and reputation. Their motive is profit.

Governments tools are fear and intimidation. Their motive is control.

You have been duped. You've been sold a lie. When you speak against capitalism and for more government control, you are working for the man.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Everyone says the reason they failed as states is because they didn't do enough socialism. Hahahahaha.

There has never been a good example of socialism yet more than half the world wants to give it another shot.

The system that's long outlived socialism, capitalism, everyone, including this video, is declaring dead. They are waiting for the second coming of Karl Marx to finally implement socialism (which has never worked) the right way.

Does that sound like rational thinking to you?

Robert159

sounds like a start.. like paypal with a card..and better bennies.
so long as it's not a fractional reserve bank im in

Robert159

lie, watch more tv

Robert159

rules are different from government taking your money to fine you more money.
and by the way those weren't anarchist they were socialist . all of us know how that works.
i grew up in a town that would be considered an anarchic society.
as to the degree that police didn't come around, and when they did nobody talked to them.
we took care of our self's and it worked out. till people quit talking to eachother.
anarchy is about property rights, starting with your body, do you own your body?
if so why is it that you must work 3 months for free? thats just income tax which is theft. not even to mention fines,violations ,and inflation.
NO VICTIM, NO CRIME ,NO GOVERNMENT.
how many victims are in the housing bubble?
and if you really think about it, america was founded on these principals alone.

If you could climb out from behind your cutesy cliches you might be able to notice the grand hoax that is going on in front of your eyes.

All around we see the world crumbling and everyone has a theory. It's a conspiracy by a shadow government that has evaded detection even in the time of the internet, say some. It's the kollapse of kapitalism foretold by Marx 150 years ago say many more. (They think he could foresee the end of capitalism, but not the failure of the 30 or more nations that attempted his broken system.) Other's see it as a sign of the end of the world on a certain day of the calendar as described by mystics a millenium ago.

No one is willing to ask weather it could have something to do with the buildup of stupid ideas that have accumulated in our society, our popular culture and our language. The other theories seem so much more solvable compared than that.

We can tell level of degeneration we have reached when our intellectuals tell us that capitalism is what causes plunder.

It is governments that have the right to plunder. It is governments that have the sanction of force. And now that we have spent a hundred years using the government to confiscate and redistribute wealth we can see that we are already half way down the slippery slope.

They (the academic intellectuals) have confused us into thinking that a system based on property (capitalism) is a system of plunder, and that a system based on coercion and force (governments) is the source of jobs and wealth.

They have fooled us into thinking that two of us trading amongst ourselves is a crime against the state, and that the government imposition of regulations is the proper course to liberty and wealth.

So I think we can tell which of us two has their head lodged in their ass, and it's not me. If you pull it out you might be able to do something more than mumble a few meaningless words.

http://profile.yahoo.com/VMUWEK47FADNXANKLT6JJLJNYM johann

Yes it's rigged & crony capitalism, which Globalization is a part of it too.

Kathie Bishop

Amazing contributions by all the key activists!! Accurately describes where we are politically and economically--and that right now we have lost the class war--so we better get with it before we lost it all---

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1096206214 Aidan Skillings

Inversely, the more money businesses have, the more control of policy making they have, effectively making a business sponsored government, in which the interests of big business are held in higher esteem than the interests of people. FYI I'm sure munitions corporations would gladly disregard your first statement.

You can't win either way, you either take the side of government or you take the side of corporations. At least the government has to -somewhat- bend to the peoples will in order to get elected. Corporations are autocratic, there are few politics involved.

Yononan

Love your comment... know it's been a month but I just wanted to respond...

I think capitalism is a great thing when the "two of us trading amongst ourselves" are two "upstanding" individuals.

If Bernie Madoff comes around the corner to trade with me... and then my neighbor, and my neighbor's neighbors... Things might just start getting out of control... What do we do then?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Stupid joke.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

And you are very poor at making a rational argument. Try thinking, then talking.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

No. People desire different types of wealth. Don't throw away all richness just for some speculated imbalance.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Militarism is a product of states. The anti-capitalists have fooled you into thinking they are the growers of food and the builders of wealth. They are statists! They are part of, or would like to be a part of the state, which is the WAR MAKING organ of society! Markets do not prefer wars!

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

State capitalism is just socialists pretending they are capitalists. Real business succeed by satisfying their customers, not by enforcing their advantage with sheriffs.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

You have to be at least 13 years old to post on these boards.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"I have never been caught up in the industrialized headache created by man..."

Are you using a computer to connect to the internet? How do you think they came into existence? Magic?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Half of all children died before they turned 15. I can understand that you may not want to have children, but you once were a child. If our great grandparents thought like you, you wouldn't exist. Are you unbiased about your existence? Do you eat?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"and wars dont bring profit???"
As you point out, WWII did not bring profit to Germany. It's leaders committed suicide 6 years after it began. Goebels poisoned his 5 children and his wife before killing himself. That's not a very good college savings plan. 10 million Germans lost their lives and the survivors had to live in smoking rubble.

War is not the favorite money making scheme of the capitalist. That is a lie that the statists have told you. It is a favorite money making scheme of the statist, who is raised on tales of brave knights who slew foreign kings and took their gold.

No wonder this fairy tale is so popular among those raised on state education. They've got you thinking that it's the merchant, the producer that prefers wars and that it is the state that stops them! Hahahahaha!!! You've been duped! You've been had!! You are preaching for the man, your patron, your overlord.

It is the state that raises armies and turns young men into cookie-cutter copies to feed to their machine. It is the market that produces food, clothing, and goods. You've been fooled and you are now regurgitating this life-hating rhetoric to others.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

The USA did not initiate the war that you imply was "prefered" by markets. In fact it was the anti-capitalist Nazzis that started the conflict.

From Time Magazine in 1939, "The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"..the life expectancy has nothing to do with it."

You don't care how long you live? You have no urge to extend the length of your life? What day do you plan dying on?

Or are you saying that you measure all good by the depletion of resources? You don't value you own life, only the total resources of "the state"?

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

They could use a car to drive to work, but they could not sell it for a profit if they no longer needed it or needed to eat.

They had property de facto, but not de jury. All property was owned by the state.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"...the more money businesses have, the more control of policy making ..."

This is only because our government has so much control over businesses and markets. If they could not set prices and manipulate markets they would not be lobbied to do such things.

I mean you make it sound like markets make politics dirty.

We used to have the same problems with the state run church. Then we instituted a separation of church and state and both institutions benefited.

We should have a separation between markets and state. Unchain the producers.

http://profile.yahoo.com/KZU57UUGMA3SEMM5GRN4FAFPOE JoeJ

Speaking of things not black or white, to add to the greyness: the Soviet Union banned religion. On the other hand, I cannot see how one can argue that communism and capitalism is amorlistic; I blame this on human nature. Knowledge is power as money is power. Both systems egg all people to attain as much of both or either one. I would egg people to listen/read Richard Wolff's discourses on republican-capitalism.

http://profile.yahoo.com/R44GNQOFRNUWKEEQ3UC24CGIKQ Doug D

Terrible documentary, if there is a better way to do it then lay it out for us. I as well as any normal person wants a better way to do things, but guess what there isnt one. Do we just keep taxing the working people to pay for the non working people? I have an idea, dont have kids if you cant afford it. Population control should be the topic on everyones mind. Less people means more resources, am I the only one who thinks this?

http://dilzybhoy.wordpress.com/ Martin Dillon

No, the Chinese thought of it before. It led to girls being sold to the human traffic trade and just as bad, the murder of new born girls. Give it a wee bit more thought and watch the documentary where there there are clearly outlined alternatives.

http://dilzybhoy.wordpress.com/ Martin Dillon

The Nazi state was a racist one from the get go.Everyone knew it and went along with it. Most if not all policies where based on race. In fact Hitler himself said that he would not announce his intended policies as he had none because he did not want to fail to keep to them. He could therefore do what he liked when economic conditions allowed him to take power by the back door - Capitalist economics - It was major business leaders that wrote to Hindenburg to persuade him to appoint Hitler as Chancellor after first refusing him. People felt they needed a strong man at the helm and the Capitalists were overjoyed at the prospect. Apart from the Jewish ones of course. Fundamentally different from the original Soviet Union which worked brilliantly at first with the soviet workers councils. Human nature, being what we are, wasted it. Whereas NAZISM was doomed from the beginning, needing propaganda to fool the Germans into voting them in as the biggest minority party.
Be wary of the creeping Fascism coming to power in the US. It is already a de-facto Fascist state with one party with two platforms. And like Hitler, they don't believe in policies, they make it up as they go along like puppets on strings controlled by the State Department, FBI and CIA - Just modern names for SS, Storm troopers and Gestapo.

"unchain the producers"
seriously.. who is the producers favorite employe?
doesn't matter.. as long as what ever product, from the food we eat, to the thousands of toxic toys, clothes etc. we produce, are produced as cheap as possible and sold as expensive as possible, the producer, in most cases, doesn't care.
this is true- and you know it.
The producers' most oftenly produce and sell to increase their own income, and not to help nature or humanity..
so let's just keep this "chained" beast chained..with less control of buisness, comes more exploitation of the poor and the worlds natural ressources.
you see, normal workers have very little influence on private companies and their ways of buisness.. buisness is greed, and it needs to be controlled.

stepitup_onenotch

This is a good film. I wonder why a couple of people who were interviewed on national TV allowed themselves to be called anarchists, such a negative term, it is bound to strike terror in the average citizen, they should refer to themselves as protesters.

http://www.facebook.com/martin.screeton Martin Screeton

Excellent Film but went a little off the beaten path with the ramblings of the anarchists :)

http://www.facebook.com/DamnationCatalyst Bill Young

That's exactly the disinformation being used to get people to think they don't want, nor need welfare services. They covered it pretty plainly in the video. It's a mentally we're the working class (near working poor) Identifies with their explorters and wants to do away with vital services that you need at this time more than ever.

http://www.facebook.com/DamnationCatalyst Bill Young

I don't think separation of church and state actually worked. You still have religion brought into politics non-stop, fellow ''Christians'' being swayed to do the ''right'' thing and now you have people wanting ''intellijunt dezine'' taught in classrooms. You also got Courtrooms and teachers mandating that people go to AA, which try as they might is a religious based program.

http://www.facebook.com/DamnationCatalyst Bill Young

I think the video was good, felt the same way about the ''Anarchists'' they should've called themselves protestors, which is what most of them were. Other than that it got back on track.

"Markets do not prefer wars!"
Markets are not sentient beings, so obviously 'preference' doesn't enter into it.

The US invasion of Iraq was to secure oil fields and thus control the flow of oil for the good of markets. When European states conquered overseas colonies militarily (16th to 19th centuries), they developed those colonies economically to benefit the mother country. Many wars are fought for control of territory and the wealth within that territory, and other economic reasons (i.e. markets)

So much for your theory that markets do not prefer wars.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

There is no such thing as state capitalism, since a) every capitalist society that has ever existed has had a state, thus rendering that term meaningless b) capitalism is defined by the individual or private ownership of the means of production. If the state owns the means of production it is no longer capitalism.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

High infant mortality is not a reason to discount the all positive aspects 99% of human history. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

The Nazi's were not anti-capitalists.They used anti-capitalist rhetoric to win votes because in the wake of the Great Depression anti-capitalism was gaining popularity in the 1930s not only in Germany but around the world. The Nazi party was funded and backed by both small and big businesses, and many of these corporations made profits before and during the war. The Weimar Republic took control of much of the economy and in some cases nationalized certain industries, but the Nazi Party were not against capitalism per se. Germany at the time ended up with a strange amalgam of both socilaist and capitalist economic policies.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Different types of wealth? That makes no sense.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Who is speaking for more government control? Cut the strawman arguments.

Profits, markets and property are impossible without state military power to protect and promote them. Governments and their war machines are the protection rackets of markets. Always have been.

You have been psychologically engineered by the Von Mises Institute.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

So if a country invades another country to plunder it's loot you would call that free markets and capitalism???

The British government made the same mistake when it formed the East India Company, and the Kaiser when he funded A. Krupp A.G.

This is not free markets. This is not capitalism. This is states playing at being capitalists.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

You have been indoctinated by government education programs to believe that war is the product of free markets. It is a product of the very state that sold you these lies.

The power of the markets is the power of reputation and profit.

The power of the state is the power of force and control.

You are working for the man.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

...To the senseless.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

The government pumped over a trillion dollars into the sub-prime housing market after 2000. That is hardly deregulated.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

This is false. There is no one anywhere near as poor as the population of Europe when Marx forged that theory.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

CAn you give any example of what was a "pure" Marxist state?

Marxists have never been accused of being consistent. That is not my fault.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

(Source: Time Magazine; Jaunuary 2, 1939.)

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

You've got it mixed around. High infant mortality is throwing the baby out.

Devon Griffiths

You're right, colonial India is a poor example of free markets (although I don't think anyone ever said it was a good example). Free markets is more along the lines of what organized crime does; business, with no rules, no interference, that's the essence of organized crime.

This is all politics of the past: socialism vs capitalism, it's just so 20th century. It's taken fifty years, but reasonable people are just so tired of this crap. Market fundamentalism and socialist fundamentalism have both failed miserably. But the mixed economy? That worked brilliantly, until it was abandoned in the 80s. And we've been paying the price ever since, sliding down this slippery slope, with everything getting continually worse. FAIL.

It's time for the shrill fanatics to shut up and let the sensible people run things.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

Organized crime is not an example of a free market. Most of the people's rights are abridged, unlike in a free market, and only the criminal tribe's rights are protected. That is not how rights-respecting free markets work. The idea that business is is a criminal process is what has lead us into the worst economic recession in our lifetimes.

When did we abandon the "mixed economy"??? In the 80's we still had about 20,000 pages of business regulations. It was still illegal for AT&T to sell computers until 1986. Why are health care costs skyrocketing? I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that it is one of the most regulated of all industries. The AMA is one of the strongest lobbying groups in Washington.

Sensible people can argue their point without insisting that other people have to shut up.

Devon Griffiths

There is no notion of rights in organized crime to be abridged. There is only profit. The "criminal tribe" has no rights either; it has power, and it exists only so long as it holds it. Rights are a concept associated with a social contract, public governance and regulation to protect those rights. They aren't a concept that's even remotely possible in the absence of a social contract.
Business isn't inherently a criminal process ... it isn't inherently a lawful process either. It's just business. It can occur in either context. Business, absent legal boundaries, would certainly behave in what would currently be an illegal manner (except that it wouldn't be illegal, since there would be no legal boundaries). There's money to be made doing things the law forbids - if there wasn't, nobody would do it, and we wouldn't need those laws.
We have been led into the current economic crisis not by people thinking "business is a criminal process", a nonsensical reductionist argument if ever I heard one, but by predatory loans made possible by changes to mortgage qualification regulations, at the behest of the finance sector.
Deregulation has been a political fad since the 1980s. I never said we no longer have a mixed economy, but the forces of market fundamentalism have been eroding it.
I am tired of the debate being controlled by dogmatic socialists and market fundamentalists. It's old thinking by a pair of failed ideas. It's time for them to take their place ... in the dustbin of history.

Devon Griffiths

As the documentary itself goes, I think it's fairly good, just not in the way the creators intended. It shows the embarrassing state of the only opposition that exists: pedantic professors yakking about Marxism, too eagerly outraged students, and unions chanting "power" in the face of losing their member's elite, privileged position in the workforce. This coalition does not resonate with the public at large, despite the crisis - yet refuses to adapt (predictable, given its composition).

I especially liked the parts where it turned into a sort of music video, romanticizing all this. Another amusing part was where they visited the tent city and talked to the construction worker. Almost the entire film focussed on student loans - this part was just thrown in there in a disconnected way, almost like showing a clip from a wildlife video to prove a point, but without actual concern. Once it was shown, people living in tents didn't come up again, because it was only a side point being made about debt; those people aren't really important except as they relate to the main point about student loans, and how somebody should do something to help those kids get the money to buy enormous homes and expensive cars like their parents.

Nowhere was any sort of solution articulated, the closest it got was a few eulogies for the Washington Consensus and Keynesian economics - a Golden Age when the middle class in the West thrived at the expense of the rest of the planet. Forward to the past!

Marx was right about at least one thing: the middle class is not a revolutionary class, merely afraid of backsliding and having to fall in with the riff-raff. Oh, the indignity!

grace&peace

corporations, the wealthy think they are doing well, because they are on the last part of the ship that's going down

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

"...To the senseless" In other words, you have no argument.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

""The government pumped over a trillion dollars into the sub-prime housing market after 2000. That is hardly deregulated."

You're equating subsidies with regulation? That's pretty funny.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Except it's not a theory. Please name me a capitalist country where everyone is rich. And don't tell me "there's different types of wealth".

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

I did not equate war with free markets and capitalism. But then, reading comprehension doesn''t seem to be your strong suit. War is to protect or enrich capitalism, yes. Consult US foreign policy.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AV5QT4VHFCPW4SLQETTI4XZWUM Brad

Oh look, a quote from a US business funded propaganda magazne. Was this before or after IBM profits soared under the Third Rech?

Nitesh

Mark, your second question "Why don't they do that now?" is very intelligent. When you ask such a question, do you mean to ask:

1. Why have they not done it already i.e. in the slightly distant past? or,

2. Why did it not happen over the last couple of years?

Depending upon which one you are marking, the answer would be slightly different. If its first, then let me start by drawing an analogy. This question is tantamount to asking a question: if something like was possible, sages of the past would have already done that.

Let me explain myself - In physical sciences, it would mean that efforts towards new discoveries should be stopped because had it been possible, it would have already been done by Einstein or someone in the past. Similarly, in social sciences, people will continue to define new ways of relating to each other, both economically and non-economically. Capitalism is one such way. In future, there could be newer ways. Even the most scientific adherents of capitalism, sometimes are so religiously tied to it that they almost find this statement blasphemous.

Like capitalism in every country has certain common and certain unique characteristics, so has socialism. Socialism of USSR was different from that of China or Cuba or Venezuela. Like capitalism has its basis and needs to continually re-define itself, so does Socialism. One form of socialism failed because there were flaws. Another form will be envisioned. So because some experiment has failed in the past, it does not necessarily mean it will fail in the future.

If your question is of the second type, then my response would be slightly different. Any such movement naturally requires lots and lots of effort, people, financial and other resources. In an age when practically all the resources are in the hands of the capitalists, something like this will be met with greatest resistance. Even if small headway is made towards this goal, it will be brutally suppressed as has been seen in various countries.

Also, what needs to be remembered is that people do not resist directly against capitalism but against the effects of capitalism. Not everyone can identify the root cause of lot of current troubles within capitalism. They naturally revolt against symptoms of capitalism but still continue to support capitalism.

Either ways, denying efforts simply because it has been failure up till now, is a rigid and illogical to the extreme. Compared to the 40,000 years that homo sapiens have been on this planet, capitalism has been there for only 300 years which is 0.7% of time-sample. I do not think we should arrive at a conclusion based on that. Moreover, given the unprecedented number of wars being fought, so many ethnic cleansing being carried out across the world and abysmal level of poverty and unsurpassed levels of individual wealth existing at the same time, the frustration with current arrangement is rising to the extreme. If capitalists are smart enough, they will see through it and rectify some mistakes. But, because pre-occupance with profit dominates everything else for capitalists, the likelihood of something like that is continuously declining.

So to sum up, if the frustration of people combines with right marketing of a new idea, capitalism could see itself in serious trouble.

Jeff Perritt

because the term anarchist is not a negative term?! it doesnt mean chaos it means those capable of imagining a reality without a government.

Hobidias Orion

Anarchism isnt a bad thing. it was demonized in the early 20th century to further their opponents political aims. Anarchism is a respectable and ideology with historical resonance.

Julien

I like the fast food protests! Had Martin Luther King, Jr. lived through his poor people's campaign, he would have had every low wage worker walk off the job for days until commerce stopped.

charliefin

The clue to capitalism is in the name. And words are programmes.

DIMOJABE

I liked it for two reasons:
1) it showed the protests our US media ignored
2) it interviewed someone who actually runs a successful worker coop saying out loud that there has to be a management system for the worker coop to survive

Good music too.

Paul

Yes! The solution of all our economic problems is .... going back to an economic philosophy of the 1850's! Not only that, we'll make it even better, let's have monopolies control everything and then whenever the boom turns into bust, let's drive the world into a depression ten times as bad as the crash of 29. It won't matter though right, becuase at least the guys who caused it will have their private jets to keep them comfortable! :):):)

Paul

It's pretty clear you've never read Karl Marx's critique of political economy or das capital, otherwise you would know that Karl Marx didn't like socialism, or dictatorships and plutocracies for that matter. Methinks you don't even know what the definition of Socialism is, a system in which the means of production are controlled by the worker. I find it funny how people say socialism never works, when Cuba has a greater life expectancy than the US, and despite the US imposed stranglehold on the economy has the second best educational system in Latin America.
Or what about the success of states like Sweden and Norway and Finland, if you'd rather a more industrialised example, after all, the Nordic nations are the greatest in the world.

http://www.thefullertonian.com Mark Stouffer

That is only one of the many faces of socialism. As you, as a proponent of socialism, should know, socialism comes in a wide variety of mutations. This is because none of the actual implementation work, and the professors must continuously modify it to differentiate the new variant from all the previous, failed, variants.

All forms of socialism have at the core the negation of the private ownership of the means of production. And that is the worst part of socialism.

The Nordic countries only succeed to the extent which they have abandoned many tenants of socialism and accepted market freedom and property.

No one swims or rows a boat from Florida to go live in Cuba. People risk their lives to flee the other way. The only people who freely defend that form of government are the ideologues who don't live under that oppression.

Marx may have hated varieties of socialists. Socialism is not based on rational discourse. It is based on wishful thinking. So there will always be conflicts between socialists (like there was between Stalin and Trotsky, or Stalin and the National Socialists), but that does not magically convert them into rational people.

Paul

And you don't think capitalism has many faces? What about Friedman's experiment in chile, or the liberal disaster that was the nineteenth century or the new liberal movement seeking to destroy the progressivism of the twentieth century? Maybe this is because none of these forms of capitalism ever work and professors must continuously modify it to differentiate the new variant from all the previous failed ones?
How is not supporting a feudalistic outlook for how an economy should work the worst part of socialism? Do you really think that a landlord should be allowed to subjugate an entire society and condemn his tenants to famine just because it's his land?
Your third paragraph is effectively the usual fallback fallacy of capitalist hardliners. It goes something like, Look!!! They have markets where people decide what goods and services they want!!!!!!!!! Now, let's ignore their huge public GDP expenditures, their Gini Co Efficient, their huge array of public health, education and childcare systems, their extensive and scoping work and welfare programmes, their large number of nationalised industries and firms, their long tradition of collective bargaining, etc.
Here, you seem unable to distinguish between an economic model and a form of government, but I'll let that slide, and just reiterate, better life expectancy, better literacy rate than the capitalist country blockading them. Something particularly laudable, I think, when you consider the fact that Cuba had to drag itself out from the oppressed, subjugated state of illiteracy and degradation it was kept in under the rule of capitalists. Capitalists who privately owned a majority of the wealth, despite being citizens of the United States. I don't expect you to respond to that last point, btw, as it's more of a political than economic comment.
Again, I really don't understand you, are you saying the only people who are rational are the uninformed, dullards who have never listened to any arguments against their position and spend their lives in a bubble thinking they know the answer to everything? Please explain.

TADLONU

This is a great film. I can't understand how "in your face" the corruption is, you can't tell me that millions of people out of work and a few thousand of other people with billions of dollars is good and just how the world works. I really like how it was said in the film "if you can find billions of dollars to bailout the banks "from nowhere" then you can do the same to help the people who are homeless, out of work etc." GREAT STATEMENT!!!!